I'm still here
I'm just real busy with life. But thanks for stopping by!

Redistributive socialism at its finest
Mugabe pulls together the best of all worlds: taking from the rich, white colonialists, and giving it to the poor, black downtrodden. Do Jesse Jackson, the NAACP, Maxine Waters, and liberal academics et al dare cheer?

End of an era
Lakers broadcaster died today. He will be sorely missed for a long, long time. Watching or listening to a Lakers game will never be the same, but rest assured that the Jell-O will be jigglin' for a long, long time even without him--as long as Shaq and Kobe stick around.

Enlightened environmentalism
Unfortunately, it doesn't exist. If it did, debates like this wouldn't need to happen. I mean, it's completely obvious that we need to thin forests out to prevent the build-up of dangerous fuel that helps spark massive, destructive fires during times of drought, but the enviro-wackos just won't allow it because it might possibly benefit the timber industry. Talk about cutting off the nose to spite the face.

And just like that, an era comes to an end
Doesn't anybody realize how monumental this is, that Chick Hearn will likely no longer be able to do the Lakers broadcasting? People, this is seriously bad news; things will never be the same.

Hamas leader says Americans weren't targets
The bomb was meant tokill Israelis.

Oh, in that case, all is forgiven.

Euro-peaceniks
They just don't understand that it's the military, stupid.

On the Europe-America divide
Victor Davis Hanson gives us another gem on the existence of real differences in values that separate Europeans from Americans. He ends by saying we'll stick together despite our squabbles, and that when it comes to our policies of global intervention, "Europe won't like publicly what we do, but privately they will agree that we did what we had to do."

Puff and huff
Many people were puzzled by the nature and timing of a particular NY Times puff piece praising Colin Powell, with nary a hint of disagreement or contrariness anywhere. Today, the Times' motive became clear with this dramatic call to action. The message was clear: Powell, you need to stand up and oppose this war on Iraq, and take a stronger stand against as much of the president's foreign policy goals as possible. Colin, you're our only hope! (Tom Daschle is too impotent apparently.) Of course, the blogosphere does not let such blatant politicking by newspapers go unnoticed. Such naked chicanery is somewhat embarrassing for "the newspaper of record" to be engaging in, don't you think?

Magic Eight Ball for liberals
Just like the real thing, only designed for hyper irrational liberals:"The far left is busy these days. Between whining about the country's war efforts and attending celebrity benefits for fashionable diseases, they simply don't have the time for trifles like political debate and thoughtful analysis of issues."

"Therefore, as a public service, buttafly.com has invented the amazing Hysterical Liberal Magic Eight Ball. So if you would like to hold a discussion of current events and politics but can't find any liberals, don't worry! Just click on the magic ball for the answer to any tough question from the point of view of an emotional, irrational liberal."

Ivy covered envy
What is the world coming to when Ivy League schools are caught hacking into each other's admissions records?

He used to be a liberal
Then he was mugged by reality.

Pharma explanation
If you've ever wanted to know how the pharmaceutical industry works, why drugs are expensive, and why reimportation of drugs from Canada won't help, go here. It's a long, thorough post, and there are tons of great replies in the Comments section, so check those out too.

If this happens
I'm walking out on baseball. Three strikes and you're out.

Death of the SUV
I don't think implementing new regulations to curb greenhouse gases is such a bright idea, but it will have one nice benefit: less SUVs on the road. As a driver of a Honda Civic and an avowed truck hater, I won't be sorry to hear that SUVs will either be getting more expensive or have weaker, more fuel-efficient engines to comply with the new emissions standards.

What will TIPS look like
Maybe something like this.

New Geneva blog
Innocents Abroad documents the frivolity that occurs daily in the world capital of diplomatic condescension and NGO/IGO self-righteousness. Check out his refutation of EU bloke Chris Patten concerning America's reasoning for opposing the ICC.

2 plus 2 equals...
Alan Keyes is getting bumped from MSNBC's lineup, despite relatively decent ratings. Is he being silenced because of his views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

Subverting democracy "for a good cause"
I understand the desire of homosexuals to legalize gay marriage, and I can appreciate the comparison to the civil rights movement of the '60s, but I don't agree that undermining the democratic process is the way to go about establishing domestic policy. The ballot meausre to ban gay marriage in Massachusetts should have gone to the voters, not quashed by the legislature unfairly. I don't particularly care for the idea of "direct democracy" and propositions/initiatives, but if you're going to have that as part of your system, then don't thwart it illegitimately.

Oh my God
I can't believe the blatant hypocrisy of The New York Times. I mean, I read both of the articles in yesterday's paper condemning Bush for the way he got rich off the Arlington Stadium deal, and the newspaper's owners are doing the exact same thing in NYC! That's beyond ridiculous. Where is their credibility, their integrity?

The impending strike
If and when the baseball players strike, I also will strike--only mine will be permanent and thorough. Sure I haven't gone to a game in years and I don't plan on going anytime soon, but there are other ways I'll show my displeasure with those millionaire loggerheads. For one, I'll stop playing fantasy baseball, which I not only love, but I'm very good at it and usually win my leagues, too. That, however, will be out the window, and my time will be spend doing other, more productive hobbies. Also, I'll stop checking scores and news about baseball on Yahoo! Sports, ESPN, or anything else. That's one less click of traffic, one less TV viewer or radio listener, one less person buying a replica jersey or a Dodgers cap.... Sure I am only a drop in the pond, but apathy is contagious. I will mourn the passing of America's pastime, but then I'll move on, and Bud Selig, Donald Fehr, will get nothing more from me than my middle finger.

Falklands flashback
Only instead of the Iron Lady, we have the wimpy Spanish, and instead of the chauvanistic Argentinean junta, we have moronic Moroccans. The end result is the same: a European power boots the imposters off the island in semi-dramatic action (more hype than substance though). Of course, this is perfectly representative of the EU, which is more concerned about symbolism than anything that actually matters like, oh, say, democracy.

Sober warning
I think this is a good reminder of why family values-type conservatives need to be careful when talking about marriage and morality. If we wish to uphold the sanctity of marriage, we have to be careful not to undermine it in other, less obvious ways.

State Dept hassling reporters?
Investigative journalism is never appreciated, especially when it serves its purpose so well. Witness the damning fallout of a recent incident that exposed how our State Department was fast-tracking visas to Saudi nationals. Make sure to get the whole story with all the background details, too.

Regime change in Iran
Thank God for Michael Ledeen's incessant harping on the need to topple the Iranian mullacracy. It seems to be paying dividends stateside.

Tax history
Yeah, you really want to read this post now, eh? Are there two more boring subjects than tax policy and history? Perhaps, but try to stay awake for a moment and bear with me. This week marks a revolutionary turn in our country's tax policy history, one that killed off the hyperinflation and stagflation era in the 1970s and paved the road for the prosperity of the '80s and '90s. We should all be thankful and respect the implications by voting against tax-and-spend liberal Democrats whenever the opportunity arises.

And what about the Mizrahim?
Barbara Lerner answers that question, informing NRO readers what should be a more well-known fact that there are millions of Jews who have always lived in the Middle East and that they indeed constitute the majority of Israelis. Yet just as they were ignored for so long in their own State, so the rest of the world ignores their existence and history.

Israel is actually a very socially complex, diverse state, with immigrant Jews from cultures and lands all throughout the world--not just Europe and the US. From the relatively small group of Falasha/Falishmura (sp.) Jews, to the Israeli Arabs, plus add in the ethnic divisions (Ashkenazi and Sephardi/Mizrahi--which includes Yemenite Jews, Farsi Jews, and Northern African Jews), and the religious vs. secular, Zionist vs. non-/anti-Zionist divisions, and you have quite a mixed up nation. It's no surprise then that there are dozens of parties in the Knesset. And still we try to fit Israelis onto the Left-Right continuum, which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever for the most part.

One thing's for sure: the more Israel feels under attack, the more all these diverse Jews pull together and cling to their Jewish identity. Hence it is downright foolish to believe that Israeli society will tear itself apart by terrorizing and isolating it; on the contrary, you will only make her people stronger and more resolute.

Amateur genius
One reason I check up on Tony Pierce's blog almost daily is because of posts like this (especially the poem). Whether or not "nothing in [t]here is true", he pumps out some of the most engaging stuff on the net with his irreverent style and random thoughts, coupled with his attention to artistic detail and poetic abilities. I have no ability to write or be artistic/poetic like that whatsoever, but I sure can appreciate it.

Euro equals dollar
I'm glad this happened this summer, and not last year while I was in Europe!

Skewered and fried
Andrew Sullivan satirizes Maureen Dowd's latest column. Ouch!

Modern spoils system?
But I think that's how politics should work. Sure it has the appearance of corruption, but when you think about it, it's a lot easier to fire political hacks from government jobs when they don't do well than it is to get rid of bureaucrats who've risen through the federal meritocracy and hence feel it should be illegal for an incoming leader to even threaten firings and shake-ups in their departments.

Oh Canada
Hey, want some cheese with that whine?

Please be a hoax
I really, really, really hope this is not true. If this is not a smear by anti-Ashcroft people, I'm going to start losing faith in our AG real quick.

Getting out of hand
Now Al Sharpton is on the scene, stirring up more trouble. Meanwhile, Maxine Waters and her followers are raising money for Crooks, who is now serving jail time for offenses he'd been convicted of ages ago. These people are the epitome of outrageously stupid.

The moon landing was faked!
Proof here!

Welch nails it
Politicians and government leaders are giving us the runaround and not telling us the truth about Hadayet and his terrorist motives. Why?

Euro-weenie backlash
Yeah, so some people apparently didn't appreciate one of my earlier posts, in which I used the word "Euro-weenie" and displayed a condescending attitude of American superiority. This earned me the appellation of "ignorant fuckwit", which is sufficiently creative to elicit a smirk from me. But I stick to my moral highground; the Europeans are hypocrites when it comes to international justice. Victor Davis Hanson sums up the situation quite well. As if that wasn't enough, Dave Shiflett goes on to speak about the Europeans' "Pipsqueak Syndrome", and brings up some interesting points originally expounded by Robert Kagan in Policy Review:

"The author begins by observing the wide gulf between American and European views. 'Europeans assert that American policy relies too much on force — that President George Bush is a cowboy — while Americans respond that Europeans are far too quick to appease dictators.' Both views are true, the fair-minded Kagan counsels, as he kicks the Europeans in the teeth. 'America does rely on strength, because it is strong — and because it is the only power capable of projecting itself into troubled areas of the world. Europe tolerates dictators because it is weak and basically has no other choice.'

"For those who do not grasp the point, a nice metaphor is employed. 'A man armed only with a knife may decide that a bear prowling the forest is a tolerable danger, inasmuch as the alternative — hunting the bear armed only with a knife — is actually riskier than lying low and hoping the bear never attacks. The same man armed with a rifle, however, will likely make a different calculation of what constitutes a tolerable risk. Why should he risk being mauled to death if he doesn't need to?'

"No sensible person can doubt this analysis. In addition, all must agree that the Europeans can adopt any policy they desire, because at the end of the day, as at the beginning, it doesn't much matter. This is especially true regarding Saddam Hussein. 'The task of containing Saddam belongs primarily to the United States, not to Europe,' says our learned guide, 'and everyone agrees on this — including Saddam, which is why he considers the United States, not Europe, his principal adversary.' And his principal target as well. Europe can reasonably say Saddam is no threat — at least to them. They're hardly worth attacking.

"They also know the true source of their security. 'Europeans generally believe, whether or not they admit it to themselves, that were Iraq ever to emerge as a real and present danger to Europe, as opposed to merely a potential danger, then the United States would do something about it, as it did in 1991.' Europe has enjoyed similar security for some 60 years, and its resentment is showing."

Hanson adds a similar observation:

"Yet the United States in some ways by its very Constitution and Bill of Rights is above such laws enacted by international councils; its vast military ensures that it is not one among equals, but possesses might far above the collective resources of both its enemies and friends. It is rare for lethal military to be coupled with humane government, but such is the case with the United States — and its unusual position in historical terms should be so acknowledged. Europe, which collectively has a population and economy as great as America's, has chosen not to field a commensurately powerful military — a choice in and of itself rife with moral implications, and explicatory as well of its strenuous efforts to place American soldiers abroad under international control."

So am I being smug and dismissive? Probably. The ICC and the Europeans who support them can go to hell for all I care. They are immense hypocrites who will gladly run around and harp on the US for its treatment of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay or lambast us for an errant bomb that kills innocent civilians attending a wedding party, or they'll go after a barely-breathing Pinochet or an impossible-to-detain-but-easy-to-criticize-and-indict-from-afar Ariel Sharon, but they won't touch the ex-Nazis, current anti-Semites, or former Soviet gulag administrators in their midst. There are plenty of war criminals wandering around Europe, but they're more interested in criticizing the one country that saves their ass every time someone raises a finger at them. Well, here's a finger back:

*flips the Old World the bird*

So Euro-whiners, there's a simple solution to all of this: you can quit giving us grief and leave us alone and let us do our peacekeeping without interference or any prospect of ICC intervention and be grateful that we fight the bad guys for you; or you can raise your taxes, quit sending welfare checks to your Muslim immigrants so they can beat up Jews, stop funding slimy, ass-kissing, corrupt, two-faced, terrorist-sponsoring dictators like Arafat, and use the money to build your own superpower-status-worthy military. Then you can walk the walk and do the peacekeeping--and ICC self-prosecuting--yourselves. Meanwhile, we'll be glad to vacation on the French Riviera, keep our boys at home guarding the border from illegal immigrants, and critique your ass-savvy peacekeeping and nation-building operations from afar.

On some islands, size doesn't matter
I got this story from Bizarre News:

Extra Large Condoms Not Needed in Britain
Britain - The Condomi condom company has officially declared its XXL condom a flop in Britain. They claim sales are low because British men are too shy to purchase the larger-sized condoms. Apparently, though, men in Germany, France and Italy aren't that bashful because the XXLs sell well in those countries. Researchers believe British men are just modest: "Research shows that most men rate their penis as smaller than average, which of course is not true," Dr. Glenn Wilson said. Oddly enough, it's only the British men that have this ailment. Victoria Wells, a Condomi rep, said, "Unfortunately, UK retailers aren't as convinced as we are that British men are well-endowed, but we hope that our research, coupled with Dr. Wilson's research, will help convince them to now start selling the XXL product."

More on religion and the state
This guy covers some of the same ground as what I tried to say here--only he does it much better.

Potatoe and single mothers
Dan Quayle may have lost the media battle ten years ago, but he's won the war. Turns out Candice Bergen agreed with the veep all along.

Who's afraid of the ICC?
So the Euro-weenies are exceptionally upset with us over our refusal to endorse the ICC. Well, guess what? Half the world's population is on our side, which I suppose gives us the democratic-populist highground. Quit pushing your elitist, condescending politico-morality on us; we don't want it.

EU baffoons
How are we supposed to take the European Court of Human Rights seriously when it convenes in this building? (The accompanying story helps illustrate why they are a bunch of boneheads.)

Invasive airport security measures?
Well, a Frenchman found a unique way to deal with the annoyance. The authorities didn't appreciate it, but I can salute his Gaulle (bad, bad, baaaaad pun).

Loved the new photo essay
In fact, I can't believe I haven't linked to any of Tony Pierce's stuff before. I keep reading him more and more, he's quite interesting. Freaky. Weird. Wrong. But cool. A new addition to the pantheon.

Putting game violence to good use
The Army is distributing a free computer game with the intent to gain the interest of potential recruits. I'll be very interested to see the data down the road that proves how successful a venture this idea is.

Euro-bashing is fun
It's also way too easy.

More Jonah
Goldberg raises another solid point: are the Democrats going to attack Bush for being in Kenneth Lay's pocket even as all these other companies are getting nailed for accounting sins? Can they have their cake and eat it, too?

Jonah, Jonah, Jonah
Alright, that column was just plain mean. Seriously, don't be so logical and reasonable. It's not fair to the other guys.

Imaginary misdeeds
Byron York lays out the facts on Bush and Harken. There's no impropriety. None whatsoever. Keep swinging away, though, Democrats. Not that you were gonna give up after being refuted anyway.

McCain hypocrisy
I'm used to reading stories accusing John McCain of being a hypocrite or worse, but this seems especially damning. Of course, it's not causing much of a ruckus because now that McCain-Feingold is passed, the Arizona Senator is mostly irrelevant. That's what happens when you make yourself a one-issue crusader--once the issue dies politically, so do you.

Progress in Russia
Russia may be coming around economically, but it's reversing progress democratically.

Islam versus France
I finally got around to reading Christopher Caldwell's piece d'resistance in The Weekly Standard, and is it ever money. Caldwell uncovers a slew of problems associated with underclass Muslims in French suburbs--most commentators seem to be zeroing in on the welfare connection--but as usual, the key issue raised by Caldwell is an intellectual/ideological problem:

"Viewed in this light, September 11 has made quite clear why certain of France's Muslims, or at least their political representatives, have refused to be drawn into the existing French order: They believe they have the stronger hand. Against 'Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful,' France proposes to pit its own national ethic, which has now shrunk into little more than tolerance. Let's not laugh at France for this--it is merely the country where a problem belonging to the West in general has become most clearly visible. It is in France that, under the pressure of Islam, the secular state is most in danger of being exposed as contentless, and therefore not worth fighting for--and where fears should be arising that, if secularism cannot be fought for as religions are fought for, it will not last long."

In other words, the girls going to school veiled, the youths attacking Jews and demanding "woospeh," and the imams preaching radical Islam on the Saudi's dime all represent a deeper problem than just welfare payments possibly funding terrorists. No, the welfare problem is just added irony--a state that is experiencing ideological rebellion by 10% of its population is subsidizing that population's rebellion. Of course, this isn't unusual for socialist policy-weaned governments and highlights yet another absurdity of left-wing ideology, but I digress. The main point that needs to be focused on is the fact that the Muslim problem in France is quickly exposing the hollowness of secularism.

In our own country, the Religious Right has been harping on this issue for over two decades, and one can argue that their force in politics peaked in '94. But their argument still exists, and just because right-wing Christians don't resort to violence quite the same way as right-wing Muslims do, doesn't mean that their intellectual rebuttal to the secular state has been snuffed out. On the contrary, the furor over the recent Pledge of Allegiance case revealed just how far off the deep end we've come with our public policies dealing with religious issues, and I expect conservative Christians to incorporate this issue into their attack on the leftward drift of society qua religion. Even near my home, a church is fighting a city to keep its property because the city wants to zone the land, confiscate it, and give it to Costco or some other giant chain so that it can reap more sales tax revenue.

The question I'm getting at here is, is secularism an independent value worth prioritizing over, say, the ability of people to practice their religion freely? I don't believe our Founding Fathers viewed secularism and religion that way, but its obvious that a great number of academics, jurists, and politicians now do. I suspect that this is mainly because, like Justice Stevens (I believe) let slip in his dissent to the majority opinion in the recent case upholding school vouchers, liberals tend to view religion as indoctrination and a barely tolerable evil that, hopefully, can be countered by exposure to reason in secular, public schools (call it the Bertrand Russell take on religion, if you will).

Yet looking at France--a society that Caldwell says erected its separation of church and state laws so as to keep religion out of the public sphere, and not the other way around as in America--we see that this more militant secularism rings hollow. The welfare state offers no real solutions to fix the social problems of drugs, crime, teen sex, et al, and that's because secularism offers no credible explanation for why individuals should seek to live according to any sort of moral code. I'm not saying, mind you, that an atheist can't be moral, or that religious practice is necessary to be a "good person." What I am merely saying is that the state offers nothing substantive to hold on to--in lieu of religious explanations--for why a young man should impose discipline upon himself and be a lawful, productive citizen. It can merely offer rewards and punishments, and obviously these are insufficient. And so, a society where it's virtually impossible for a strict Roman Catholic to take his religion seriously (let alone a pious Muslim) without offending the public order is predestined to retain all the negative aspects of modern civilization without any of the positive influences that religion might bring into the picture.

The Muslims in France know this, and that's why they have no problem standing by Allah--they know the national ethos of France is hollow and nobody will stand and fight for it. What would the rallying cry be? The social imperative? Will any Frenchman fight so that his 14 year-old daughter can receive condoms and have access to abortion, or so he can watch porn on TV, or go to the local pub and get drunk after work? I'm not saying these sort of things should be eradicated from society by government fiat, merely that they don't constitute a substantive core that one might idealize and fight for. I mean, really, if it comes down to it, in the battle between promiscuity and Allah, who is actively going to fight on the side of promiscuity? Here in America, we can talk about the "cultural wars," but I don't think it will ever escalate to bloodshed. With the radical Muslims, I think it's almost a promise that there will be bloodshed if things aren't resolved.

So, among other things, I think Caldwell raises a vital point: that we can't defeat Islamo-fascism without reforming ourselves a bit, too. And one of those key reforms is not to change this into a holy war of Christianity vs. Islam, but to change it away from secularism vs. Islam because secularism is not a powerful enough meme to eradicate radical Islam. What is needed is a real societal acceptance of the place of religion in public life--and of this France is in dire need. Secularism must be one aspect of civilization, but one that can accommodate those who believe strongly in their faith and wish to take their religion seriously. Religion is not just a private matter as much as we'd like it to be. This does not mean the state must coerce people into being religious; on the contrary, that is what the radical Islamists want and what we will refuse to allow. It is what we are fighting against, in one sense. What we must allow more freely is the interfacing of religious practice and public experience; we need to create a society and culture that allows religion to be discussed in the classrooms, allows kids to gather and pray and read their Bibles in between classes if they so wish, for parents to use vouchers to send their kids to parochial schools, and for the government to begin looking at religion as an asset in the fight against social ills. Let the wall between church and state come down, and let the two institutions work together in any manner short of literal Establishment (Obviously I am taking a Rehnquist-Scalia-Thomas view of the Establishment Clause). In France and Europe in general, things are more dire, and I really don't think secularism will be able to hold. There needs to be a simultaneous tolerance for religious practice and a more strenuous opposition and crackdown on radical, rebellious influences.

And dismantling the bloated, soft-on-crime welfare state wouldn't hurt, either.

Update--Just read Stankley Kurtz' article from yesterday's NRO. I think his documentation and analysis of Lind's book review back my position up pretty well. We're supposed to be nonsectarian, not secular.

Old news, relevant news
Check out this article from 1999 that talks about how air rage is almost completely an invention of the media and airlines to cover up the "series of underlying problems with the industry as a whole"--the same problems that eventually led to more than one airline threatening bankruptcy and demanding cash infusions from the government to keep afloat.

Insta-wisdom
Glenn Reynolds cuts through the bull and points out the real lesson of the LAX shooting:

"Instead of crafting ever-narrower definitions of terrorism, or looking for easy solutions that won't work, both government officials and pundits should consider how we might mobilize the most potent anti-terror weapon of all: the citizenry."

Self-fulfilling prophecy
Vodkapundit has the scoop on where the real population and environmental problems are, and why they will only get worse if the sanctimonious leftist Greenie-weenies have their way in implementing measures like Kyoto on the West industrial powers.

When peace is a synonym for war
Check out the ultimate goals of this Palestinian peace activist. Just reinforces my skepticism that peace will never happen in the Holy Land.

Practice safe sex
Learn everything you need to know by playing a Flash game.

Nonsensible drug policy
However you view the War on Drugs and the legalization question, I think we can all agree that we need to have a stance that makes sense to the common person and to the policymakers and law enforcement agencies. Well, in Britain, they're tossing that out the window. Apparently, Tony Blair wants to stop prosecuting the use of marijuana for leisure, but continue going after those who sell the drug. This makes no sense and is inconsistent. Why not just completely legalize pot and regulate the amount that can be sold for consumption? What really makes no sense to me, however, is that they are talking about legalizing ecstacy. Why? Unlike pot, ecstacy is dangerous; the first week I was at Cambridge, a girl had died at a party from the drug. I've seen it happen over here, too--I've had friends who have lost their friends and family members to the drug, and other friends who have gotten into serious trouble because they were around that type of drug use. According to to the Times, part of the reason for the new policy is to "gain greater credibility among young people," but I'm sure British kids will think it's just as idiotic as I do. Why is it so hard to create a sensible drug policy?

Savage smackdown
I like Dan Savage's columns (I have a link to them on the left), because despite some of the sick stuff he writes about and endorses in his column, overall he's a breath of fresh air and common sense when it comes to any sort of public discussion about sex--straight or gay. That same common sense is on display again in his The Stranger article from last week. Witness this clarity:

"So the left needs to put down the PAP symbols and put away the 'No War' posters. We're at war, ya dopes. Simply stopping the war now--rather than holding the United States to the standards we set after the last world war--would harm the very people the left professes to care about. Afghanistan needs a Marshall Plan now; Iraq's going to need one soon. U.S. smart bombs and troops, the left should argue, have to be followed by smart money and medicine and a constitution and an American commitment to long-haul nation building. We have to do for Afghanistan and Iraq what we did for Germany and Japan; anything less is immoral and indefensible. That's the argument the left should be advancing."

It's encouraging to see voices arising on the Left and supporting the war. Even better, it's good to see that they have a moral vision for why we should be fighting and are trying to slap sense into their ideological comrades. Sometimes I think guys like Savage and Christopher Hitchens have a better understanding of what we are fighting and how we must go about it than the so-called hawks and neo-cons on the Right.

More Hadayat discussion
Was he or was he not a terrorist? John O'Sullivan has the clincher:

"And the final conclusive piece of evidence that he was a terrorist — he had once been slated for deportation by the Immigration and Naturalization Service but the INS changed his mind and allowed him to stay in the U.S."

Of course, his best argumentation comes at the end:

"What seems to be the explanation is that the U.S. government is less afraid of terrorists than of the American public. For the authorities the terrorists are a known factor. Their habits and "M.O.s" can be categorized and studied; their actions predicted; and precautions against their attacks mounted."

"But the American public is an unknown beast which the political and media elites long ago decided was racist, sexist and homophobic. Our betters fear us. If not guided and controlled, they believe, we will hit out in dangerous spasms of violence at minorities, immigrants and anyone who looks like 'The Other.' We cannot be trusted with inconvenient truths. In particular, we have to be prevented from launching discrimination and attacks on Muslims and Arabs in bigoted response to terrorist outrages."

For more evidence of this syndrome, see the Jesse Jackson piece below.

"Hence they seek to calm our latent hysteria by keeping the words 'Muslim' or 'Arab' as far as possible from the word 'terrorist' lest we leap illegitimately to the conclusion that Muslims and Arabs in general are terrorists. Hence Hadayat (who is undeniably Muslim) is shrouded in ambiguity by the FBI as a lone wolf figure whose motives are unknown and unknowable."

"As I pointed out a few weeks ago, these establishment fears are grossly exaggerated. Since September 11 only 51 cases of civil discrimination and 65 cases of criminal threats and violence against Muslims were found to have merit. In a nation of 270 million people, these statistics amount to a very small backlash indeed — one greatly outweighed by the many attempts of ordinary Americans to assure their Muslim neighbors of their goodwill and acceptance."

All this recitation is just more evidence of our tolerance amidst all the patriotism and worry about terrorism and Islamo-fascism--yet another refutation of those who equate patriotism/nationalism with racism and accuse Americans of being stubborn capitalist colonialists who are out to oppress everybody else in the world who isn't white.

"In fact only one thing is likely to provoke the unfair suspicion and hatred of Muslims and Arabs that gives nightmares to Uncle Sam — namely, the fear of ordinary Americans that their government is not taking commonsense measures to protect them against terrorism because it is afraid of offending groups from which the current crop of terrorists comes."

Exactly. The real problem is the wishy-washy, super-sensitive approach that the FBI takes towards these cases, which in the end causes the public to lose faith in our leaders' abilities to protect us from the terrorists.

In terrorism denial
The LAX incident is only the latest example of government being in denial about the terrorist motives of murderous attackers. Daniel Pipes recounts numerous earlier incidents and how the government's position directly contradicted the known facts--as known then and now.

Morally obtuse
And you wonder why people don't respect Jesse Jackson as the legitimate successor to MLK's civil rights mantle? Just read this load of baloney, where Jackson calls John Ashcroft and George W. Bush "the most threatening combination in our lifetime." Threatening to what or who? Threatening to you, maybe, because they have the influence and respect to tear to shreds your bogus relevance to any issue whatsoever in the public sphere. Go home, Reverend. Go home and shut up.

Are newspapers outdated?
Not yet, argues Sidney Goldberg--father to NR's Jonah. But, the day is coming, and there is a lot of technological promise to take the basic format of what a newspaper is/does and make it more instantly useful and relevant, instead of a being a dinosaur in comparison to the new media that have fostered and taken advantage of the so-called 24-hour news cycle.

This is cool
Rapatronic photos of nuclear explosions, taken in the '50s.

"Denial really is a river in Egypt"
Mark Steyn rips the FBI, Underperformin' Norman, and everybody else who seems to have trouble concluding that Hadayet was an anti-Semitic, hate-motivated killer. Of course, if the victims were homosexuals or blacks, there's no doubt how everybody would've responded, but...well, just read Steyn. He covers it well, and with good sarcastic humo(u)r.

Other way around
I think Andrew Sullivan has things a bit backward here. In his interview with Time Out, Sullivan says:

"It gets so exhausting trying to explain oneself. People are very conservative, really. They're like Homer Simpson; they like their beer cold and their queers flaming. Homosexuals that are complicated, or don't fit into any category, they feel threatened by."

I tend to believe it's the exact opposite: most people are annoyed by the radical queer leftists but feel more comfortable when they know a gay or lesbian more personally who "seems normal". When I hear Christian preachers going off about homosexuality, it's invariably couched in the terms of the decadent, promiscuous gay lifestyle advocated and flaunted by those types who Sullivan is always railing against. I have a feeling that if Andrew Sullivan was the type of homosexual that came to mind when most people thought of the term, such rhetoric from the pulpit would be much less effective. People may still feel it is immoral and wrong, but they're not dumb; they know life is complex, love is complex, people are complex. I mean, how often do they deal with teenage pregnancies, adultery, molestation, and other sexual misconduct in their own churches? But radical queers don't seem complex; they aren't the same breed of problem. They simply seem like fruitcakes, nuts, and outrageously immoral sinners in the eyes of very conservative, religious folk. And that's what motivates them to stand out with signs picketing Disney and fighting gay marriage and adoption tooth and nail, and the more extreme of them to murder and commit other violent, heinous acts (Matthew Shephard, R.I.P.).

Stupidism rears its ugly head
You gotta hand it to the gun control activists: they can turn any news item into a handy reason for why guns should be banned. Witness The Guardian's Peter Preston, who argues that the LAX shooting should be seen in the context of America's violent, gun-obsessed culture:

"Two innocents killed at a ticket check-in are two too many. They are also mere drops in the ocean of blood which the US allows to flow daily - including on July 4 - through a society where guns and gun culture remain ubiquitous."

You have to wonder, are these people incredibly clever at finding ways to fight a self-righteous crusade against a perceived evil, or are they just incredibly dumb? I'm honestly not sure which.

Found the motive
Why did the Egyptian national Hesham Mohamed Hadayet gun down two Jews at the El Al counter in LAX's Bradley Terminal? Was it terrorism? Was it a hate crime? Maybe he was depressed or on drugs? No, it because his wife is an ignorant moron of the highest degree.

The Yankees are sickening
They are bad for baseball and I hope the sport goes belly-up because of their excessive greed.

Not surprised
So Nader went to Cuba and met with Castro. I'm sure they had lots in common and yacked away for a bit, smiling and nodding and slapping each other on the back. My only question: how did Carter beat Nader to the punch? Bizarre. I would've thought Nader had a freakin' vacation home in Havana or something.

Missing the obvious
After checking to see if I moved up the rankings over at Google for Ann Coulter pictures, I noticed something that should have been obvious: you can see some pictures of Ann Coulter just by clicking on the "Images" tab at the top, after you've done your search. Duh, that was easy. Why didn't you Ann Coulter stalkers notice that before? It would've saved you the trouble of coming all the way over to my site and finding only fool's gold.

Alright, here's a pic
If you really want to see a picture of Ann Coulter, read her latest column over at Townhall, and look for her picture right up under the title. Sorry, that's all you're gonna get; I ain't no celebrity porn linkin' site.

Google suicide bomb
Alright, if I'm going to have people come to my site looking for pictures of Ann Coulter, I might as well make an attempt to be at the top for that search as well. So, pardon what you're about to read (hey, just don't read it), but I'm going to just repeat "Ann Coulter pictures" multiple times and see if I move up. (I'm currently relegated to halfway down page 3 of the Ann Coulter pictures search.) Here goes nothin':

"Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures Ann Coulter pictures"

Sorry about that folks. Blatant, hideous, evil, all of the above, I know.

Cool Google news
I am the top-ranked site for the search "odelay vatos". Cheech and Chong would be proud, I'm sure.

Funny
Everybody's either coming here from random Google searches or because my URL ended up in their web traffic monitor. Are we all really that narcissistic? "Wow, I wonder who came to my site this hour, and from where?" Jeez, I check out the sites in my report too, but the ridiculousness of it all is just hilarious. I think Insta-envy is a much bigger malady than anybody has so far publicly recognized.

Funky Google searchers
Why do you people keep coming here looking for pictures of Ann Coulter? I have no pictures on this site, and you're a sicko for getting off on pictures of shrill blonde columnists.

Trashing the Left
Check out a good roundtable discussion on the bankruptcy of the Left in response to Islamo-fascism. It's the Cold War-era Lefty response to communism all over again, only worse.

LAX shooting
How about a behind-the-scenes critique of the law enforcement response? FBI waffling aside, the facts make it obvious that Hadayet was a Jew-hating terrorist.

Orthodox in space
If you're a Jew and you're thinking about going into outer space sometime, please remember that Torah still applies. What's the problem?

"There is an old joke about the first Jewish astronaut who returns to earth utterly exhausted. He is asked: 'What happened?' He replies: 'shaharit, minhah, maariv, shaharit, minhah, maariv!' In other words, a spaceship orbits the earth once every ninety minutes. If each orbit is considered a 'day' of twenty four hours, an observant astronaut would spend most of his time praying, and after every six orbits (or nine hours) he would have to observe Shabbat for ninety minutes. As a result, he would not only be exhausted, but have no time to do whatever he was sent to do!"

Have no fear, however. Some rabbis have reasoned through this and there are now some guidelines you can follow.

Carpe Latin
If you like your news in Latin, try this Finnish website.

"The war of the memes"
Excellent post over at The Truth Laid Bear concerning the "memes" of OpposeIsrael and IslamicFascism, and our own memes of DefeatAlQaeda and OpposeTerrorism. TLB uses the science fiction concept of the meme--a computer virus that evolves and spreads to humans, eventually infecting nearly everybody. The really bad part is each meme is "bent on destroying all the other memes." Take the Palestinians:

"Many Palestinians, for example, have been running a meme for decades --- and yes, that means some of them have been running it their entire lives. I call it OpposeIsrael. This meme is pretty simple: it says that Israel is evil, and anything they do must be bad and must be combated; violently, if necessary."

"The problem is that OpposeIsrael crowded out other memes that Palestinians really should be running; memes that might have led --- and could still lead --- to a better life for Palestinians. OpposeIsrael is inherently negative --- it dictates that its hosts put the goal of destroying Israeli hopes above that of fulfilling Palestinian ones."

The positive memes would be things like PalestinianFreedom, ArabDemocracy, and PalestinianProsperity. There's a lot more to this analogy, and it's a fascinating way to approach the subject of how the battle of ideas plays out in the real world. Go check it out.

College students and business ethics
A recent NAS/Zogby poll raises some disturbing questions about how colleges are approaching business ethics. In the survey, most students believed that hiring a diverse workforce was more important for a business than dealing honestly with its investors and creditors. Also, an overwhelming majority reported being taught that ethics is dependent on the context and based on individual differences and cultural diversity, rather than that there are uniform standards of right and wrong which apply to everybody. Finally, most of these same students felt Enron was the rule, not an exception, and that business is the most likely avenue to succeed if you're unscrupulous. Note to universities and business schools: this is not how you develop an honest, accountable workforce consisting of workers who have integrity. Bashing business on the one hand, and preaching relativism and inculcating cynicism on the other, is not conducive to a successful and ethical marketplace.

Bankrupt theophobia
The dissenting opinions in the school vouchers case reveal that the opposition to vouchers isn't so much based upon logical constitutional history and analysis, but rather blind fear of and irrational opposition to all things religious. But, the fundamental demand for justice--that lower income minority children from the inner cities have the same options to attend private or parochial schools as better-off white suburban offspring--must be addressed, and it's a battle cry that should be picked up by conservatives and Tories on both sides of the Atlantic.

Bumper sticker Christianity
I came across a joke, and it reminded me why I never put Christian bumper stickers on my car, from when I first began driving until this day. First, here's the joke:

"I was at a stop light, behind a car with a bumper sticker that said 'Honk if you love Jesus.'"

"So I honked. The driver leaned out his window, flipped me the bird, and yelled, 'Can't you see the light is still red, you fucking moron?'"

Of course, I don't react that way at all when cut off by or otherwise forced to deal with asshole drivers. *smirk* Still, what kind of a witness am I being if I'm speeding over the limit by 10-15mph, weaving in and out of traffic, and otherwise being impatient and in a hurry to get to where I want/need to be, while toting a sticker that says "No Jesus, No Peace, Know Jesus, Know Peace"? It reminds me of an Orthodox Jewish friend of mine (I won't, ahem, name any names, RR!) who always remembers to remove his kipa when visiting less-than-reputable watering holes. Sure, perhaps on some level we're being disobedient and hypocritical, but I see no reason to create needless opportunities for nonbelievers to scoff at Jesus (or Hashem), Christianity (or Orthodox Judaism), religion in general, and those who chose to participate in organized (disorganized is more like it) religion.

Gimme some Love
The smartest thing Courtney Love ever did was marry Kurt Cobain; this was a savvy decision for many obvious reasons. The second smartest thing Courtney Love ever did, however, was write this screed/manifesto. It's long but brilliantly defiant of the corporate pirates that pretend to comprise a legitimate industry. I've always trashed the copyright laws coming from a pro-Napster perspective, but the real merit lies in what Courtney makes crystal clear: the present set-up screws over the artists and audiences alike. Sure, it's a cash-cow for stodgy, backward-thinking stiffs in Hollywood, Nashville, etc., and hence there's little incentive for them to make change any easier, but there are ample ways around them if just a few enterprising people with money who respect music artistry would step forward and take the lead in forming a system that treats artists as more than temporary hires that can be trashed and recycled at the whim of a few execs who think they know what good music is.

Just so you know...

:: how jedi are you? ::

Some fresh air
I've read too many reports by journalists lately pissing on the World Cup, calling it substandard and such. That's nonsense; from my perspective, it was wonderful, and I've found someone who was there who agrees with me. Of course, the experience in Japan has been considered much less successful than in Korea, but that's a minor distinction--this was without a doubt one of the best World Cups ever.

America's failed diplomacy
A Norwegian blogger has some advice for how America should approach diplomacy and treaties: stop being blunt and truthful and start lying. He observes,

"Many Americans will immediately tell the truth if asked about something, and only then wonder if a lie would have been better. Instead you should lie first, and then ponder if perhaps this time you should have told the truth. After all if you lie you can always tell the truth later on, or another lie, but if you have told the truth then you are stuck with it."

Some of his more specific advice:

"European Question: What do you think of the Kyoto accords?
The American Means: It is the worst waste of time and effort since someone decided to translate 'How to speak French' into French, it's total bullshit and we're never ever going to ratify it or abide by it, and the only reason you bring it up is to satisfy the useless enviroweenies in Europe.
The American Should Say: It is a splendid initiative, we are working hard to have it ratified even as we speak, and will do our utmost to abide by it, and I must say I am impressed with your concerned and capable citizenry that makes it such an issue.
The American Can Now: Go right ahead doing what he was already doing, and he can still keep the accords in ratification limbo."

While this is indeed humorous and indeed even practical advice, I'm all for the blunt approach. I think it's high time somebody in world politics pointed out the elephant in the middle of the room (i.e. the insanity of a lot of what passes for international law and the sorry excuses for what pretend to be serious international political bodies) and proceeded to take the axe to it. First step: start being honest. End goal: get rid of the United Nations and similar meddling bodies that have no business trying to impose their liberal agendas on the various national governments--especially our own.

USA v. ICC
Why are we fighting the International Criminal Court? Steven Den Beste has the lowdown. His is easily the best, most lucid and coherent, explanation I've read to date. He covers most of the facets, and correctly hits the main argument, which is we can't join the ICC because our Constitution does not permit it. The Euroweenies just don't understand this point--for them, Constitutions are meant to be ignored, overridden, amended, or rewritten on a whim--but we will never approve it. Never, ever, ever.

These guys are wrong
The Bush/Gore analysis found here is fascinating, but inaccurate. We Southern Californians say "Coke", not "soda", when we're referring to generic soft drink beverages. I think where they messed up is they probably got their sample from college students who study here but are from elsewhere in the country. Come to think of it, pretty much nobody in California is from California anymore, but then again, when was that ever the case? Us native-borns are minorities in our own state, methinks!

That about sums it up
Andrew Sullivan's brief take on the Egyptian who killed two people at LAX is on the money.

Bourgeoise niceties
Apparently, us liberal Westerners have trouble calling a spade a spade--except when they're on the right; Sidney Goldberg points out how our dictionaries call Hitler, Franco, and Salazar dictators, but reserve names like "leader," "statesman", "revolutionary," and "chairman of the Communist Party" for guys like Stalin, Castro, Tito, and Mao. Witness these further examples:

"The American Heritage alludes to 'Hitler's fascist philosophy.' Here is its definition of fascism: 'A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.'"

"Fair enough, especially if the Nazi variation is being described. Communism, on the other hand, is captured this way: 'A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.' No mention of terror and censorship, and no dictator."

There's more:

"Right: 'A political group, as a faction or party, whose policies are conservative or reactionary.' (OK.) Left: 'Those who advocate the adoption of sometimes extreme measures to achieve the equality, freedom, and well-being of the citizens of a state.' Sounds warm and fuzzy. Isn't it possible that even the right cares about the well-being of the citizens of the state?"

"In Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary (2001 edition) the right, among other things, opposes 'change in the established order' and favors 'traditional attitudes and practices.' Fine. The left, meanwhile, advocates 'change in the name of freedom or well-being of the common man.' Again, noble motives are assigned to one side and not the other."

Some may think this is splitting hairs, but you're being incredbly dishonest if you overlook the biases portrayed in these definitions and think what the dictionaries say are all hunky-dory. It's sublte jabs like these that help reinforce the bunker/persecution mentality that many conservatives have nowadays.

"America should celebrate its independence"
Pointless title, no? But, in fact, its a great play on words, because what Mark Steyn means by independence is America's independence from the rest of the West in how it runs its government. In contrast, the Europeans like to dictate and run things from the top down:

"That's where the EU, in their haste to line up at the Eurinals and spray their contempt over Bush, are missing the point. Who is this arrogant cowboy, they sneer, to tell the Palestinians whom they can vote for. Actually, that's not what Bush said. The guys who tell people who they can vote for are the Europeans. Only a couple weeks back, Tony Blair and Gerhard Schroeder told the French to vote for Chirac. In February, the Belgian Foreign Minister threatened sanctions against Italy if they voted for Umberto Bossi's Northern League. When Austria proved less pliable and admitted duly elected members of Joerg Haider's Freedom Party to the coalition government, the EU did, indeed, impose sanctions."

"But to suggest to Palestinians that things might go better if they elected a non-terrorist leadership is apparently unacceptable. Arafat has far more blood on his hand than Bossi, Haider, Jean-Marie Le Pen and Joerg Haider put together and multiplied a thousandfold, but he's the West's guy: they can talk to him, strongman to strongman, Jacques to Yasser. Suddenly Bush comes along and says not that he wants a non-Yasser President but that he'd like a new constitution, separation of powers, an autonomous legislature, independent municipal institutions. Where does that sound like? Britain, where Tony Blair can simply replace one house of the legislature with another more to his liking? Canada, where municipalities are abolished by order of the Ontario and Quebec governments? No, it sounds like he wants a U.S. Constitution for Palestine, where President Yasser Clinton and Vice-President Mohammed al-Gore get hamstrung by Senator Ahmed Helms and Senator Walid Thurmond, and, either way, it makes no difference to the residents of high-tax Ramallah or no-tax Jenin. Is Bush just winding up the Kofi set? Hard to say. But you can understand why the EU recoils from such a vision: If separation of powers were to catch on in Palestine, who's to say it mightn't spread to the Continent?"

Eurinal, very clever. Steyn finishes:

"There's a famous Fleet Street headline often cited as an example of British isolationism: 'Fog In Channel, Continent Cut Off.' But the odd man out isn't necessarily the guy in the wrong. On matters such as the role of the state, concentration of power, and the usefulness of international institutions, I'll bet on the Americans: There's a fog in the Atlantic, but it's Europe that's cut off."

I love my country. I mean, when you think about it, we're all a bunch of religious nuts and free thinkers who fled persecution, cocky snobs who felt we could succeed better if not trapped by Old World-style government strictures and corruption, and gun-toting cowboys who believed we could turn a dusty Old West into a thriving, bustling hub of civilization through saloon fights and hangman jury justice. No wonder the established, "cultured" Europeans bristle at playing second fiddle to us brash Yanquis.

Old article, timely wisdom
The Republicans have ample opportunity to develop a free-market-oriented environmental policy that would be very appealing to the electorate, but because they're so focused on opposing the extreme Greens instead of brainstorming sensible policy, they get nowhere.

Something's rotten in Denmark
No, literally. A Danish judge has ordered a website to stop linking to Danish newspaper articles online. I'm confident this could never happen in America, but it's a nice reminder that there are still plenty of morons out there who want to try to put limits on people's freedom of access to information via the World Wide Web.

More bad news
It's just been one bad thing after another as far as aviation news today in Southern California. First, three are killed in a shooting at LAX, and later at least one is killed and scores injured when a Cessna crashed at a park out in San Dimas. :-(

How patriotic are Americans?
Some fascinating poll data put together by the folks over at the American Enterprise Institute.

Mucho ado about nothing
Don't believe any of the blathering nonsense being spewed forth in the press about the Bush administration seeking to slash EPA Superfund money. In response to the media's overblown coverage, Jack Shafer of Slate provides a thorough Fisking of Times writer Katharine Q. Seelye for her biased and manipulative reporting of the Superfund issue.

(An aside: why do I feel like the NY Times is being ghost-written by the DNC lately? Seriously, just read Bob Herbert's latest screed, as full of misinformation as misguided ideology. Is the environment really getting worse, against all evidence pointing to the contrary? Or are we just trying to tarnish a still-extremely popular Republican president?)

Not as smart as his pa
Saddam Hussein's stepson was arrested in Miami after apparently trying to enroll in flight school without a proper visa. Dumbass.

*Update--Belated bad humor--maybe he should've tried Mastercard.

Empty threats
The US has decided not to pull out of the UN peacekeeping mission in Bosnia just yet because our representatives at that wonderful body have apparently seen a glimmer of hope for a resolution over the ICC impasse. In addition, some council envoys made a veiled threat against Israel in an attempt to manipulate the US to move towards acceptance of the court's jurisdiction over its troops:

"In addition to the Bosnia operation, four other U.N. peacekeeping missions come up for renewal in July alone, including the U.N. mission in southern Lebanon, which polices the volatile border between Israel and Lebanon."

"Shutting down that mission in a spat over the new court's powers could have serious security implications for close U.S. ally Israel, council envoys warned."

What bugs me here is the fact that the UN people have done little to protect Israel, and always scuttle out of "hot" areas. Syria, ironically temporary head of the Security Council right now, bears full responsibility for all hostilities in the border region, as their troops not only occupy Lebanon, but they also give a free hand to Hezbollah to terrorize Israel from across the border and funnel arms through Damascus from Iran. Of course, a quick glance at history books would also reveal that before the '67 war, the UN peacekeepers gladly relocated so that Egypt could mass its troops along Israel's Sinai border, and UN soldiers have stood by while countless other atrocities were committed during many other missions. Tell me again why we even bother with these people?

Rupert Murdoch is a genius
FoxNews has been the cable news king for six months now, and recent changes at CNN have failed to reverse CNN's fortunes, although their ratings did go up slightly. Really, FoxNews is a success not because it's better broadcast journalism than CNN, and I don't entirely agree with those who attribute it to the glut of "confrontational" shows on FoxNews. Rather, I think the key reason is Murdoch knew that there was a gold mine to be had by tapping into the deep-seated belief of those millions of people who feel that the news is biased and liberal. Really, all FoxNews did is make more of an effort to include the conservative viewpoint; their coverage is fairly similar in bias to other stations simply because "objective" journalism is never just that--there's always a slant.

Good ol' Mexican justice
I'm sorry, but I completely feel that this is a great way to treat child molesters and rapists. Okay okay, I'd settle for chemical castration, but I won't be shedding any tears for this guy.

Powerpuff violence
Hey, maybe I'd enjoy watching this movie after all.

Your tax dollars at work
Remember, airport security is now federally funded, so incidents like this are only more evidence that government involvement inspires less competence, not more. Thanks to underperformin' Norman, our airport security strip-searches old ladies instead of going after the real threats.

I guess the Euro didn't help much
The German economy is still crashing and burning, giving the center-right a major theme to run on in the coming elections. The EU countries as a whole will need to cut back on social spending and waste to compete with the American and Asian economies and it will take more right-leaning leadership to accomplish that.

Again I say
Nuke 'em. If we can't reform 'em, fry 'em.

Malaria and DDT
I read a good article in the Orange County Register op-ed section today, but thanks to the Register's love of frames, I can't link directly to it. Essentially, the authors gave evidence showing that when big government bureaucrats and NGOs (at the advice of alarmist environmentalists) think they know best, people die--in this case millions of them. Despite DDT's record as a hazardous insecticide having been almost entirely refuted, and against the knowledge that even sparing and careful use of the chemical would save millions of deaths from malaria, the World Health Organization--among others--is continuing to oppose its use to fight malaria-laden mosquitos and tetse flies and insist on its blanket ban even in areas of the world where the benefits in lives saved would far outweigh any of the supposed environmental costs (which, as I said, have been disproven anyway).

It almost makes me wonder if these high-ups are letting the people die because of racist motives (Nah, only white Southerners, fundamentalist Christians, and conservative Republicans are guilty of that), or perhaps they still fear the "Population Bomb" and therefore are content to let millions die so that we don't overpopulate our planet and cause irreparable damage. Then again, these are often the same people crying loudest about drug companies not giving away their AIDS and HIV-fighting drugs for free (which they in fact do to some extent) when the real villians are those politicians in Africa who contribute to the ignorance and spread of the disease among their own people.

LA secession
It could happen this November, and here's why. Personally, I am for it, as I think the only way to reform the Los Angeles municipality is to first take a sledgehammer to it, and then start over.

Are we supposed to be surprised?
Actually, this is just more evidence that we're taking the wrong approach, and that we need to follow the Israeli model of looking for terrorists rather than looking for bombs, weapons, and nail clippers. This means we need to start profiling. Until we get with it, we're wasting our time and doing nothing more than needlessly annoying passengers and running up high security costs.

Please, no Bush-bashing on the economy
Andrew Sullivan lays it out for those who would see a demise for the American economy based on recent corporate and accounting scandals:

"After the crash of 1987, the Democrats and liberals made every effort to portray the 1980s as a decade of greed, fomented by selfish Republicans. But that is politically much harder to do with the 1990s. It was an era when the Democrats finally managed to persuade Americans that they could manage the economy. Today, the Democrats don't have any deep incentive to alter that perception. That's why they want to link the current corporate excess with a Republican administration - a strategy undermined solely by the facts."

Of course, it's a given that Democrats will campaign on this stuff and conveniently ignore the fact that if there was any fault here on a president, it lies solely at the feet of Bill Clinton.

What's up with judges these days?
First it was the Pledge decision, and now a district judge says the federal death penalty is unconstitutional. This also is sure to be overturned, but if there is a lesson to be learned here, it's that DNA testing shuold be required in all capital cases to eliminate the possibility of fudging the evidence and ensure that only the truly guilty are punished.

World Cup wrap-up
The tournament is finally over, and despite the awkward TV times, I managed to catch most of the games live. My overall impression is that the game has taken a major egalitarian turn; so many countries stepped up and proved that they could play with the big boys. However, traditional team stereotypes also proved accurate, as if to show that the more things change, the more they stay the same.

Hats off to Japan and South Korea for being great hosts; they (especially S. Korea) proved the naysayers wrong with the quality of the venues, the hospitality (by all accounts), and most remarkably, the mettle of their teams. I particularly enjoyed watching Japan and was bummed they couldn't get beyond the Round of 16, as their ferocious quickness was a marvel to behold. And South Korea looked very strong, powerful, and relentless. The two Asian qualifiers (China and Saudi Arabia) showed they were nowhere near the level of play of the co-hosts and made quick, lopsided exits. The Korean team thrilled its fans but sadly never got off the peninsula (an appearance in the final in Japan would have been great ironic drama).

The biggest disappointments I think were the African teams. I was appalled that Cameroon could lose to Germany even when up one and then two men, and Nigeria showed its youth and inexperience. Tunisia and South Africa were not expected to impress, and they didn't. Senegal ended up the surprise, upending France in the very first game and moving on to become the only African team to advance. Methinks that maybe the African athleticism has been overstated a bit, but nevertheless there is tons of talent there for the picking if only the continent had the money to develop some decent leagues.

The CONCACAF teams were steady, with Mexico and USA each advancing to the Second Round and Costa Rica being sent home by Turkey and Brazil. Costa Rica just peaked too early, while Mexico dominated their group unexpectedly--most expected the Italians to cakewalk. The USA plainly did not deserve to advance after its showing against Poland and every American involved with US soccer should be kissing Korea's collective ass for that bit of luck. Of course, Portugal stunk and didn't deserve to go either, so perhaps the US deserved to advance by default. All this is not to say that we didn't have a great team--we did, and they proved it against Mexico and Germany--it's just that the way we advanced was sickening. And Mexico.... All I can say is, I root for Mexico most of the time, but I also despise them. I've played soccer against Mexicans, and it seems to be in their mentality that it is okay to play cheap, to commit dirty fouls, and to act. I have no respect for that and until the Mexicans can start playing like gentlemen, I hope they keep getting one-upped by us norteamericano bullies.

The South American teams were all over the map. Paraguay showed flashes of brilliance but in general suffered a lack of talent. Ecuador also was not impressive. Uruguay proved it had the skills to advance, if not the luck, while Argentina succumbed to the hype. Frankly, I've never been impressed by them, and they don't seem to do nearly as well when they can't get away with using their hands. The England-Argentina match was supposed to be a blockbuster, but Argentina was shut down nonchalantly. Sweden just plain embarrassed them. Brazil, however, was Brazil. One might say that the demise of Brazilian soccer has been proven to be greatly exaggerated. They won every game, and while they can be faulted for a bit of luck in the first Turkey game, they proved the second time around that they really were the better team. The flair was there, and so was the defense and goalkeeping, surprisingly. My one complaint is that some of the Brazilian players can act with the best of them, especially Rivaldo and Ronaldo. In general, they act like a bunch of wussies out there and seem afraid to play physical soccer. But there is no denying the immense talent on that squad, as seems to be the case year in and year out. The country is just a superstar soccer stud factory, and they deserved the championship.

And then there are the European teams. Of course, no team from Europe has ever won a World Cup outside of Europe, and that held true again, so maybe predictions of a French dynasty were a bit premature. As a matter of fact, I was shocked not that France got bounced early, but that they couldn't even score a goal. Undoubtedly the injuries to their midfield were consequential, but how do you have the leading scorers from the Italian and English premier leagues (Trezeguet and Henry) and fail to score a goal? Unbelievable.

Oh, and let's not forget the whining Italians. Hey, pardon my French, but fuck the Italians. They are snobs in their country, and they're whiners in soccer, too. They play ugly soccer, are content to score a goal and play lock-down defense (even when they don't have the talent to truly do so), and think everything should go their way by divine right. Of course officials screwed up and called back a couple goals; no doubt Italy was robbed there. But they blew other chances, so I don't want to hear any of it, and that threat by the Italian club owner to dump the Korean player who scored against them was plain petty.

Portugal was arguably the most overrated squad out there. Luis Figo is good but he looked tired and exhausted from his club schedule, and the Portuguese defense was laughable. Not only that, but they were just plain stupid to get two red cards against South Korea. Their Iberian neighbors Spain lived up to their disappointing reputation and proved they can whine almost as well as the Italians.

I can't say much about Slovenia, Croatia, Russia, and Poland. The Slavs were collectively very disappointing, and the Russian rioters in Moscow didn't warm my perception of them either.

On the other hand, I love Ireland, and their fans are the greatest. Ireland plays with so much heart, and at the end of the day--win or lose--their fans salute them proudly. Roy Keane was not missed.

The Scandinavian teams proved the shockers of the tournament, with Denmark and Sweden each winning their group. Denmark in particular looked daunting after their dismantling of France, but England humbled them. Meanwhile the Swedes looked downright dangerous on the attack, with their feet and their heads. Sweden-Senegal was a match you hate to see because someone has to go home the loser, and unfortunately for Sweden, Senegal was able to get the Golden Goal.

England was, well, England. Hot and cold, brilliant and embarrassing, unstoppable and flimsy....If you look up "inconsistent" in the dictionary, you'll find a photo of the English team right there. They looked magnificent against Denmark, stodgy against Nigeria and Argentina, but clumsy against Sweden (a match they should have won), and intimidated by Brazil. In fact, England apparently never came out of the locker room at halftime of the Brazil game, and they weren't particularly impressive in the first half either. I love England, but rooting for them is as bad as rooting for USC football--they always disappoint in the end and their glory years were about thirty years ago.

Belgium, how did they get in? Talk about boring soccer. Germany was supposed to be boring and weak, but they looked sharp. I was very impressed, and no doubt Oliver Kahn had a great deal to do with their run. Sure he had trouble handling a rocket shot from Rivaldo, but then who wouldn't, especially in the rain? They were downright scary in the air, and their defense looked impenetrable at times. I retain my biggest compliment for their ball handling skills and passing precision, however--stuff that I wouldn't expect from Germany.

And then there was my favorite team of the tournament: Turkey. From their opening game against Brazil, I was impressed; they didn't back down, they fought hard, and they had some major skills at every position on the field. I applaud their third place finish, although I would've liked to have seen them upset Brazil for payback's sake. A Turkey-Germany final would've been great, too--I could just have imagined the riots that might have broken out in Germany had the Turks won that one. Incidentally, I was in Turkey when Fehnerbace (sp.) won the Turkish soccer league title over Galatasaray (at least I think I remember that correctly) in May, 2001. I just love that country, for many reasons. I expect Sas, Ilhan, Umit Davala (ugh--what a terrible mohawk) and the goalie to be hot commodities this year as the various European powerhouse clubs make efforts to strengthen their squads.

Speaking of hot commodities, I think American players and Senegalese players also can count on some fat paychecks coming; there will be a lot of competition for their services. It's too bad MLS doesn't have the financial wherewithal to hold onto its biggest stars and lure others from overseas.

The final was good, and Brazil deserved to win. There were some exciting almost-goals, and Ronaldo's pair were splendid finishes. Ronaldo's haircut was ridiculous, but I understood the message behind it; the statement was that Brazil needed to push their players forward and attack to win, and they did. I already can't wait for qualifying to begin for the 2006 tournament!

Telling us what we already knew
The link between poverty and lack of education to terrorism is tenuous at best:

"In light of our results, we would urge intellectuals and policymakers to exercise caution in presuming that poverty and education have a direct and causal impact on terrorism."

Nyuck nyuck nyuck
Should've seen this coming:

"I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION, (SPONSORSHIP OPPORTUNITIES AVAILABLE), INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL"

No European anti-Semitism?
Liberal Jews now recognize it:

"Even the left isn't immune from the growing sense of siege. In a recent interview, the liberal novelist Amos Oz confessed he's haunted by his father's observation that, before the Holocaust, European graffiti read, 'JEWS TO PALESTINE,' only to be transformed in our time into, 'JEWS OUT OF PALESTINE.' The message to Jews, noted Oz: 'Don't be here and don't be there. That is, don't be....'"

"But in the last few months Israeli despair has broadened. Israelis now fear not only that they will never be accepted in the Middle East, but also that they will never be accepted in the world at large...."

"'The suspicion slips into the heart that maybe the ultra-Orthodox were right when they warned that a sovereign state for Jews would annoy the nations and bring annihilation on the remnant of the Jewish people,' wrote Peggy Cidor, a former left-wing activist, in Kol Hazman, a secular Jerusalem newspaper. 'The state of Israel, which was intended to give the Jews an entry ticket into the family of nations, didn't deliver the goods. We're still being judged by separate standards; there is still no proportion between our actions and the responses around the world.... It was nice to feel like everyone else for a while, but that seems to be over.... The state of Israel has turned into the "Jew" of the nations....'"

"Most of all, it's American support that keeps Israelis from total despair. The United States is the great exception that doesn't prove the rule. It challenges the subversive Jewish voice that whispers, 'Don't trust the goyim; at the moment of truth, they'll betray you.' Israelis know that in moments of truth, the United States has stood with them and presumably will do so again. President George W. Bush's tacit endorsement, in his Rose Garden speech this week, of Sharon's strategy--denying Arafat's terrorist war any political gain--has reinforced Israeli faith in the United States."

"Israel's psychological struggle is between the optimism of the '90s and the despair of the '70s. International detractors who turn every Israeli act of war into a war crime and subject the Jewish state to a level of moral judgment not applied to any other nation are inciting the very hard-line forces they deplore.... Those Israelis who cling to Zionism's promise and insist on remaining part of the world are fighting for their lives."

From this fantastic article in The New Republic by Yossi Klein Halevi.

Old news
Yes, but it was still a shock to me. I just came across a brief mention of a mural that now apparently exists on the wall of a Scottish church depicting Jesus being held by his mother near the cross, with Roman guards and Israeli soldiers standing nearby. A more complete description and the story, along with links to newspaper accounts and the actual mural, are here. Something about that sort of blatant political anti-Semitism in what should be a house of worship deeply disturbs me.

Brazil 2, Germany 0
Yes, I had to watch it on the Spanish channel in order to see it en vivo, but it was well worth it. Brasil looked superb, with Ronaldo executing two brilliant, opportunistic goals to beat the best goalkeeper in the world (Initially I think Ronaldo was intimidated by him, especially in the first half). I'll have a complete rundown of my thoughts on the World Cup, the teams, players, and champions, later.

More evidence of European anti-Semitism
And this is from Britain's Independent.

From the "No duh!" dept
I'm getting pretty sick of these useless FBI warnings. I mean, there might be terrorists thinking about attacking us on Independence Day? No way! They should cut the crap and forget the colors until something specific comes along, like, "We have information that Al Qaeda operatives are planning to blow up the Golden Gate Bridge sometime in the first week of August." Anything less than that is moronic and insults the intelligence of the American people, as well as tries our patience.

So call me an extremist
In a saner world, more people would agree with this guy.

More regime change please
Where is Pakistan on the list? And would someone please tell me why we should care if India decides to nuke them?

Christian self-defense
David Ross has an interesting take. I'm not sure the verses he uses are properly contextualized, but he cites an interesting interpretation by one of the Jesus Seminar guys:

"In a Jennings special on the Historical Jesus, back in Y2k A.D., John Dominic Crossan said that being slapped on your cheek was a symbol of shame. In this case, assuming a right-handed population, you would be slapped on the same cheek. To turn the other cheek to such an assailant would force the assailant to strike you as an equal - to start a fight, in other words. It is in this spirit of resistance that Jesus talks back when the High Priest slaps him in John 18:22-23 (as pointed out here). Ditto the 'take my shirt' comment - removing one's own shirt in front of an aggressor is an internationally recognised challenge. The message is clear: if one insults you, your response is to call him on it."

This is news to me, and I'll have to look into it, but it's an interesting and plausible interpretation in my view.

And St. Augustine says....
"Wars are always unfortunate but it would be more unfortunate for the unjust to triumph over the just. The necessity of going to war to prevent this may certainly be regarded by good people as being a blessed course of action."

Via "The Sanity Inspector" found at this post's comments.

Jesus, war, and coins
This is the best essay on Christian pacifism and just war theory that I have read in a long time. The skinny:

"And so Jesus said, "Render unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's...."

"'Must a Christian be a pacifist?' I am not trying to answer this question, because it cannot be answered. It is as fatuous as the question, 'Must a Christian be a warmonger?' Instead I am writing for the one purpose, to my readers both Christian and not, of exposing nonsense."

"For to say that, because we are Christian, Caesar must never fight wars, is to present Caesar's coin to Christ. He does not want it."

David Warren correctly notes the fallacy of taking the admonition of Jesus to "turn the other cheek" and applying it to states and political authority. Indeed, Jesus and the disciples are largely silent on political theory as the complicated ethics of war, as Warren points out, I think the best we can do is extrapolate from Old Testament examples, but even then most of the arguments I've seen are very tenuous. I do believe Christians put themselves in quite the precarious bind when they presume that all truth, knowledge, and good advice is somewhere, somehow, directly rooted in the Bible. Yes, I believe the Bible is God's Word, and I believe it is authoritative on what it speaks about, but I do not believe it speaks about everything under the sun, as convenient as that would be for us.